Adobe on Tuesday announced the release of Flash Player 10.1 for Mobile, pitching it as "the first release that brings the full Web across desktops and devices."

Adobe said that Flash Player 10.1 will be available as a final production release for Android-based smartphones and tablets once users are able to upgrade to Android 2.2, dubbed "Froyo." The mobile version of Flash was also released to platform partners to be supported on devices based on BlackBerry, webOS, future versions of Windows Phone, LiMo, MeeGo and Symbian OS.

"We are thrilled that more than three million Flash designers and developers are now able to unleash their creativity on the world of smart phones, tablets, netbooks, televisions and other consumer electronics," said David Wadhwani, general manager and vice president, Platform Business at Adobe. "The combined power of the leading rich media technology platform with millions of passionate creatives is sure to impact the world in ways we havent even imagined yet."

"We are excited that Android is the first mobile platform to support the full Flash Player," said Andy Rubin, vice president of engineering at Google. "Now mobile users can browse the full Web on their smart phones, and Android developers can use industry-leading tools to create immersive experiences on the Web."

Adobe originally intended to release Flash 10.1 in the second half of 2009, but it was later pushed to the first half of 2010. In April, the company revealed that its new mobile Flash player would slip to the second half of 2010, but Tuesday's release would suggest that the delay was not as significant as was originally anticipated.

Apple Chief Executive Steve Jobs noted Adobe's delays earlier this month at the All Things D conference, when he was interviewed by Walt Mossberg and Kara Swisher of The Wall Street Journal. Jobs noted that there are no smartphones shipping with Flash installed, to which Mossberg responded that there "will be."

"Well, there 'will be' for the last two or three years," Jobs quipped. "But HTML5 is starting to emerge."

Jobs also noted that his company has a history of abandoning technology it feels is on the way out, noting that they were one of the first to get rid of optical drives with the MacBook Air.

"When we do this, sometimes people call us crazy," he said. "Sometimes you have to pick the right horses. Flash looks like it had its day but it's waning, and HTML5 loos like it's coming up."

While Apple has banned Flash from its devices powered by the iPhone OS, including the iPhone, iPod touch and iPad, it has embraced HTML5. The exclusion of Flash has been pegged by Apple on the Web format's alleged instability and high power consumption in mobile devices. The fight between the two companies has been a matter of considerable debate, but many major Web sites have turned to HTML5 since the release of the iPad.

In addition to banning Flash from its mobile Web browsers, Apple also changed the iPhone developer agreement to ban third-party tools that would allow software to be ported from other formats, like Adobe Flash, to native iPhone OS software. Jobs said such tools would result in substandard applications on the Apple-controlled App Store. Those changes have come under federal scrutiny, as the Department of Justice and Federal Trade Commission are considering an antitrust inquiry into the matter.

The desktop counterpart of Flash Player 10.1 for Mac shipped earlier this month after more than six months of beta testing. The plugin works with Firefox, Opera, and Safari browsers, but it does not yet include official support for hardware video acceleration. Users who want early hardware acceleration must download Adobe's preview release of "Gala" H.264 hardware decoding, allowing Flash videos to play more efficiently on Macs.

Adobe is trying to pull one out of SJ's bag-o-tricks. Like Apple announced no Flash authoring for iPhone the day before CS5 was released. Adobe is hoping Flash on Android will rain on Steve's parade tomorrow. Probably without much effect though.

Time will tell if Flash survives the move to mobility. Is Jobs right or wrong? The same people asking how they will view the "full internet" without Flash on the iPhone/iPad are the same ones who asked how they would transport their data without a floppy drive on the iMac. If you are on the Apple bandwagon you know it can be a bumpy ride at times but it always works out in the end. And this is a very different Steve Jobs these days. If Flash actually proves to be workable Jobs can turn Apple on a dime. Apple has some big clout these days with content providers. Would you like to be the company who's web site cannot be viewed by those 3 million iPad users, and god knows how many millions of iPhone users? I think not.

Yep because Flash is sooooo much better as a closed and proprietary toolset. Love freedom of choice - don't necessarily love Adobe.

And before the Adobe fans get all riled. Stop. I've been doing this for a longer time than Flash has even existed. So don't even trot out your arguments and your yeah-buts. It's OK. You can like/love yer Adobe tools and I don't. That's the real freedom of choice. The proof of the pudding is in the eating as they say. It still remains to be seen if Adobe has been able to pull a decent implementation out of their hat, or if they have concocted yet another version of Flash Lite. Thankfully, with the collusion of Google, maybe, just maybe it will be nice to the Android fans out there and work as hyped. Until then, its still just smoke and mirrors.

If anyone doubted that Google has no commitment to quality nor real interest in promoting open standards, this should be the final nail in that coffin. They really have no principles that they live by other than greed, and their only commitment is to do anything they can to undermine whatever stands in their way. And I use the word "undermine" deliberately. Google isn't about creating something great that can succeed on it's own merits. They are about investing as little as possible of their own efforts and then trying to succeed by monkey-wrenching everyone else.

I don't think they will succeed with this particular ploy, but it doesn't really matter to them, just like it doesn't really matter to them whether WebM/VP8 is really viable as an "open" video format. They create wreckage when and where they can and try to profit from the destruction when it occurs.

I still don't get the big deal over Flash. 95% of the flash content on the web is vomited out crap or video (which could be viewed without it). Someone doesn't really know how to do something so they use Flash.

Also, the reason they need to list specific models mobile flash will work on is because they had to optimize the code for each model or it wouldn't work well. And still it won't do everything and will suck power. Try working with an EVO on 4G while viewing flash. Will that give you a 1/2 hour maybe an hour of use.

I've got it on my Nexus One running FroYo. I will say that it really slows the system down. ...

So, it seems that they still haven't provided a version for mobile with acceptable performance. Frankly, given the nature of the technology, that shouldn't be a surprise. As much as they don't want to admit it, it's likely simply not possible to have good performance and Flash.

It took awhile but I am starting to see things Apple's way on this one.

Adobe says Apple is holding them hostage. But if Apple continues to rely on an outside provider (Flash) then Adobe can hold Apple hostage pretty much anytime they want to. A cleaner example would be: What if Apple did not provide iWork. Then Microsoft could hold Apple hostage over a wordprocesser.

I think Steve may be right. Also, this could be precisely the right timing for this shift away from Flash.

There is simply no good reason to have Flash on a phone. If the developers or web owners are too lazy or cheap to build an alternate site for mobiles then they deserve to lose the mobile market share. Just because Safari can browse a regular designed for desktop site it doesn't mean it is an enjoyable user experience.

Funny. I suspect the world would still be waiting for mobile Flash if SJ hadn't made such a public deal of it not being released.

It's mid-2010 and Flash still isn't viable or universal across all Android phones, much less all non-iOS devices on the market. I absolutely believe that if not for Apple pointing out what a piece of crap Flash Lite is Adobe would even be farther behind than they are now. This "see we technically have it running on one version of one mobile OS on one device" is nothing more than a Pyrrhic victory they are trying to spin into a masterful "told you so" against Apple and only a few seem to be being it at this point.

Dick Applebaum on whether the iPad is a personal computer: "BTW, I am posting this from my iPad pc while sitting on the throne... personal enough for you?"

I believe they only have released for frodydro all other systems in "the coming months" wtf does that mean, so they didn't REALLY release it for everything they released one crappy version for ONE version of android that most android users can't update to yet. BRILLIANT

So, it seems that they still haven't provided a version for mobile with acceptable performance. Frankly, given the nature of the technology, that shouldn't be a surprise. As much as they don't want to admit it, it's likely simply not possible to have good performance and Flash.

Let us know how long your battery lasts.

Battery life ain't great. Looking at the battery usage stats, my browser power usage has gone from usually under 5% to about 17%. That said, it's still the screen that seems to do the most damage. Watch anything for 2 hours, and you'll go through the battery. So it's not as bad as I expected it to be.

But the system lagginess. The browser page laginess. All that's annoying.

Battery life ain't great. Looking at the battery usage stats, my browser power usage has gone from usually under 5% to about 17%. That said, it's still the screen that seems to do the most damage. Watch anything for 2 hours, and you'll go through the battery. So it's not as bad as I expected it to be.

But the system lagginess. The browser page laginess. All that's annoying.

I wouldn't be doing this on a regular basis.

But I can put up with it to watch some Football!

But now imagine if all web developers jumped on Flash because it was a universal and portable standard, and suddenly ALL the content you viewed and used (including your apps from the AppStore) was Flash. Not so good.

Adobe has been polishing this turd for years. It might be a bit shinier now, but its still a turd. Don't take SJ's word for it, do your own research.

But now imagine if all web developers jumped on Flash because it was a universal and portable standard, and suddenly ALL the content you viewed and used (including your apps from the AppStore) was Flash. Not so good.

Adobe has been polishing this turd for years. It might be a bit shinier now, but its still a turd. Don't take SJ's word for it, do your own research.

Well, I think he just did, and he can correct me if I'm mistaken, but the verdict seemed to be that it was an interesting novelty, but, no, he wouldn't want all his content as Flash. This seems to be a sort of anti technology demo. Adobe has demonstrated Flash running on one mobile platform and shown that, despite what we can justifiably assume to be their utmost efforts, it sucks.

But now imagine if all web developers jumped on Flash because it was a universal and portable standard, and suddenly ALL the content you viewed and used (including your apps from the AppStore) was Flash. Not so good.

Adobe has been polishing this turd for years. It might be a bit shinier now, but its still a turd. Don't take SJ's word for it, do your own research.

Nowhere have I ever defended Flash. However, it's a reality of the web today. I'd rather have the ability to watch a few World Cup matches on my phone or view a restaurant's menu (for whatever reason this genre tends to be Flashtastic all the time) then not at all.

In the end, if the capability is not there, who's losing out? Me.

I still won't be patronizing sites that are Flash heavy. And I don't think we'll see apps (even on Android) that are Flash heavy because they just won't run as smoothly. I think the transition to HTML 5 is inevitable. But I'd like to not be cut off from the vast trove of web content before that happens.

It took awhile but I am starting to see things Apple's way on this one.

Adobe says Apple is holding them hostage. But if Apple continues to rely on an outside provider (Flash) then Adobe can hold Apple hostage pretty much anytime they want to. A cleaner example would be: What if Apple did not provide iWork. Then Microsoft could hold Apple hostage over a wordprocesser.

I think Steve may be right. Also, this could be precisely the right timing for this shift away from Flash.

If that's true (and not I'm saying it is or isn't) then Apple didn't make the decision to ban Flash from Appledom for the sake of its users, but did so for the sake of its business interests. Nothing wrong with that. But they should be honest about it.

... But I'd like to not be cut off from the vast trove of web content before that happens.

Vast trove? Yes, those porn site operators do like to remain anonymous.

But, seriously, I think your own experience points out quite clearly that Google and Adobe are just giving people false hope here. Flash just isn't suitable for mobile, but by insisting that it is and that it's coming, people delay what will be an inevitable move away from it, wanting to avoid having to do something new. They will eventually have to throw off their denial and do it anyway, but they are cutting themselves off from a huge number of eyeballs in the meantime, and taking the risk that, in the meantime, someone who isn't buying into Adobe's empty promises will take the opportunity to eat their lunch.

If that's true (and not I'm saying it is or isn't) then Apple didn't make the decision to ban Flash from Appledom for the sake of its users, but did so for the sake of its business interests. Nothing wrong with that. But they should be honest about it.

There are two parts to this. First, Apple doesn't want Flash or any meta-platform because it gets in the way of developers taking advantage of native capabilities. Secondly, they don't want Flash player because they don't want performance and user experience to suck. In both of these cases, what's good for Apple is also good for users. So, are they doing it for themselves or for the users? The right answer isn't apparent if you engage in dichotomous thought. In fact, they do it for users because it's good for them too, which doesn't mean they are being entirely altruistic, nor does it mean they are being entirely selfish. It means that they can and do make choices that are good for both parties, and it's mistaken to try to paint them into either corner.

If that's true (and not I'm saying it is or isn't) then Apple didn't make the decision to ban Flash from Appledom for the sake of its users, but did so for the sake of its business interests. Nothing wrong with that. But they should be honest about it.

In an 'ideal' world they should be honest about it as everyone should be honest about their motives, I guess, but no business is ever honest about their motives. Or rather - they never tell the full story. On the other hand we all know that the primary driver for most business decisions is profit. The picture is more complicated than that but the one thing we do know is that no business makes decisions that is not in their strategic interest.

[QUOTE=solipsism;1658501This "see we technically have it running on one version of one mobile OS on one device" is nothing more than a Pyrrhic victory they are trying to spin into a masterful "told you so" against Apple...[/QUOTE]

I think Jobs "bashing" Flash was more to light a fire under their butts than to "kill" the platform...

If Adobe gets it together and solves the issues Jobs has put forward, I mean really solves them (and they really are valid points), I could easily imagine Apple saying something like, "that's better", and allowing it in...

The thing is, I don't see Adobe getting it polished enough (to Jobs' satisfaction) in time before HTML 5 really takes hold. Entrenching their technology (going the MS route) without seriously improving it over time doesn't help anyone. Least of all users. It seems like their focus has been more about deepening the trench instead of really getting the issues seen to...

It's their loss if they can't get onboard the forward moving train... I've seen some of what HTML 5 can do, and it eliminates 80% ~ 90% (or more) of Flash's advantage... and you can bookmark HTML 5 pages. One of the great downsides to Flash since the beginning.

I wonder how many people will disable flash on their new flash-10.1 capable phone.

you have to want it to install it or want to enable it to run it in the browser. it doesnt automatically download things on web pages. it has a flashblock like functionality where it doesnt download unless you ask it to. There's nothing "evil" about having flash on android. in fact, of all the things I'll miss about this HTC EVO, flash will be the largest one. I was able to play video on nearly every site I visited just using flash lite and from everything i've seen flash 10.1 allows much better framerates in video as well as more compatibility with other sites (likely the ones using AS3). this plugin was badly needed to get people weened off of as1-as2 code where flash lite has kept them. as1-as2 is a large reason why there's crappy performance on flash. as3 is up to 10 times as fast and flash player 10 improves on that even more.

mac still sucks with their player. hardware video decoding isn't going to fix that. it's something with the way the stupid thing garbage collects that causes the player to skip. i fucking hate flash on mac. they REALLY need to fix it in a big way and stop dicking around making new products to leverage their flash frameworks.

If anyone doubted that Google has no commitment to quality nor real interest in promoting open standards, this should be the final nail in that coffin. They really have no principles that they live by other than greed, and their only commitment is to do anything they can to undermine whatever stands in their way. And I use the word "undermine" deliberately. Google isn't about creating something great that can succeed on it's own merits. They are about investing as little as possible of their own efforts and then trying to succeed by monkey-wrenching everyone else.

I don't think they will succeed with this particular ploy, but it doesn't really matter to them, just like it doesn't really matter to them whether WebM/VP8 is really viable as an "open" video format. They create wreckage when and where they can and try to profit from the destruction when it occurs.

I think they care about open, but they care about making money more. The thing that bugs me is just how shameless they are in twisting things around. To call Flash freedom from Apple's closed oppression is such ridiculous garbage. Funny that these same Adobe enthusiasts & google fanboys will dump on Silverlight all day long, failing to realize Flash is exactly the same closed type system!

I just can't stand hypocrites. At least Apple is stating openly that their decision was a business one, they are betting on the HTML5 horse as the way of the future. Given Apple has been right about technology trends for just about the last 10 years I think I'll go with Apple.

We can all hope that flash move out enough before Android tablets gets out so the impact of having it is not to great.

In the mean time its sucks to the roof to not be able to access my cable TV channels on my ipad because the ipad is the device I have when I would need to access them. Same goes for plenty of channels I dont even have on cable but are broadcast using flash on the web.

[QUOTE=paxman; I guess, but no business is ever honest about their motives. Or rather - they never tell the full story. On the other hand we all know that the primary driver for most business decisions is profit. The picture is more complicated than that but the one thing we do know is that no business makes decisions that is not in their strategic interest.[/QUOTE]

If a company doesn't make a decision for there own interest what the product is concerned you can not be a real company. If a floppy was excluded in a PC, it was a disadvantage, yes it was for some people during the transition time. If you don't do it, you also could have preferred to stay in the stone age. Computers were created to increase productivity. Some people lost there job because of it. If you see the boost and the opportunity it provides is amazing. Flash is past and get over it. Look at the future.

I think they care about open, but they care about making money more. The thing that bugs me is just how shameless they are in twisting things around. ...

Well, that's because they have no principles besides greed and a desire to "dominate". I really do think however that they completely cynical when it comes to "open", and that they only care about it as a way to manipulate minds.

Actually, it's not. This announcement is the final (I think it is the 8th GM, IIRC) release version. They've had 3 years to work on the beta.

And even though it's a final version, reports are that it's still not very good.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jetz

If that's true (and not I'm saying it is or isn't) then Apple didn't make the decision to ban Flash from Appledom for the sake of its users, but did so for the sake of its business interests. Nothing wrong with that. But they should be honest about it.

And that's the point you consistently refuse to understand. Apple's business interests ARE to make things better for their users. Apple does well by focusing relentlessly on user experience. You simply can't separate Apple's business interests from improving user experience.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jetz

Nowhere have I ever defended Flash. However, it's a reality of the web today.

It's essentially nonexistent for mobile devices today (yes, today's announcement means that a few tenths of a percent of mobile users will have Flash. BFD). You don't seem to understand that just because something is prevalent on desktop computers doesn't make it feasible for mobile users.

And even its use on desktop computers is far less critical than it once was, as well. Whether you can thank Apple for that or click-to-flash remains to be seen.

"I'm way over my head when it comes to technical issues like this"Gatorguy 5/31/13